The Riggs Report: Interpreting Gov. Brown's vetoes

Hundreds of bills face review over next 60 days

It’s always enlightening, and occasionally entertaining, to read Gov. Jerry Brown’s reasoning behind his decision to veto bills that reach his desk. Think of these tidbits as political fortune cookies.

President Obama's appearance on the "Tonight Show with Jay Leno" this week in Burbank -- his sixth visit-- was a reminder of what an important platform the program has become for politicians and would-be politicians alike.

This week, we saw another example of that, with Brown opining that “not everything in life is for sale, nor should it be.” The governor was referring to his veto of Assembly Bill 926, which would have allowed women to receive pay in return for undergoing a medical procedure to harvest their eggs for medical research.

There’s a distinction here. There’s nothing to prevent women from selling their eggs to a fertility clinic. But California imposed a ban on payments for medical research a half-dozen years ago. Assemblymember Susan Bonilla, D-Concord, sought to roll back that ban.

Brown’s concern, as he explained in his veto message, was how to ensure true informed consent. “Putting thousands of dollars on the table only compounds the problem,” Brown said, referring to the uncertainty of long-term risks associated with the procedure.

The governor’s reference to the folly of price tags reminds me of another celebrated veto message he issued two years ago, in which he said that, “not every human problem deserves a law.” That, of course, is the antithesis of the legislature, which exists to churn out legislative “solutions.”

Brown’s message was attached to Senate Bill 105 by Senator Leland Yee, D-San Francisco, which would have forced parents to pay a $25 penalty if they allowed their children to ski or snowboard without wearing a helmet.

Brown’s messages, while memorable, aren’t gimmicky. By contrast, there was the messages Arnold Schwarzenegger delivered once, for example, that spelled out, in acrostic fashion, an obscene message aimed at San Francisco Assemblymember Tom Ammiano.

Schwarzenegger was unhappy about being heckled at a Bay Area appearance, but his advisers called the not-so-subtle message merely a coincidence.

We’ll be seeing plenty more examples of these glimpses into Brown’s philosophy in coming weeks. Hundreds of bills are churning through the Capitol machine en route to the end of the legislation session on Sept. 13.

There is a key difference this year. Last year, Brown angered labor allies by rejecting so-called “job killer” bills that would have required meal and rest breaks for nannies, and would have required growers to provide farmworkers with shade and cool water. He rejected spending increases and measures to increase government regulation. That came, of course, as he was campaigning for voters to pass Proposition 30, a package of temporary taxes.

This year, with no election, Brown will face another flood of bills, including potential measures that would make it easier to raise taxes and the state’s minimum wage. He’ll have 30 days from the end of session to decide which get the green light, and which will be struck down by his veto pen.That means more fortune cookies are on the way.